by Open Mind » Tue Feb 13, 2024 2:07 pm
Galaxy12 – “As nature repeatedly demonstrates, it is in balance”, “Both attractive gravity and repulsive gravity theories yield identical results in most practical situations”,
Picturing gravitational ‘pull’ seems to make a suggestion to me that the universe is a delicate balance of subtle forces of gravity that have very low influence at a distance, but conversely have an enormous force with an accumulated mass locally. What’s challenging is that if it’s a push, then if the object of that push force grows in mass from an accretion, then its hard to imagine a push towards that object, when its a key actor in determining how strong that push is, which naturally feels more like a pull, if the actor is responsible for the degree of the force. If Jupiter gets ‘pushed towards’ more than Earth, and it is because Jupiter is more mass, then Jupiter is ‘responsible’ for that additional push, and with causation of the event, then ‘pull’ seems more appropriate, just in a semantic sense.
In analogous terms, how can we make sense of a ‘push’, when that push increases with the more mass that is pushed towards it? The only thing I can think of that captures this relationship, while still seeing it as a ‘push’ is the effects on someone as a result of ‘cancel culture’. It seems it starts with a small influence, and evolves into a landslide as a result of how much more easy it is to jump on the bandwagon of critical condemnation, lol.
Hoping we can find a better analogy that paints the universe in better terms. Lol.
But if I simply use that functional analogy, then it seems as though push increases with more mass on that object, as if the increase of mass also increases a charge disparity? Maybe more like water funneling down a drain hole made of sugar. The more water that funnels through it, the wider that drain wears away to a wider opening? Scrambling and mixing analogies here. If anyone has a better idea, I'm wide open.
Galaxy12 – “As nature repeatedly demonstrates, it is in balance”, “Both attractive gravity and repulsive gravity theories yield identical results in most practical situations”,
Picturing gravitational ‘pull’ seems to make a suggestion to me that the universe is a delicate balance of subtle forces of gravity that have very low influence at a distance, but conversely have an enormous force with an accumulated mass locally. What’s challenging is that if it’s a push, then if the object of that push force grows in mass from an accretion, then its hard to imagine a push towards that object, when its a key actor in determining how strong that push is, which naturally feels more like a pull, if the actor is responsible for the degree of the force. If Jupiter gets ‘pushed towards’ more than Earth, and it is because Jupiter is more mass, then Jupiter is ‘responsible’ for that additional push, and with causation of the event, then ‘pull’ seems more appropriate, just in a semantic sense.
In analogous terms, how can we make sense of a ‘push’, when that push increases with the more mass that is pushed towards it? The only thing I can think of that captures this relationship, while still seeing it as a ‘push’ is the effects on someone as a result of ‘cancel culture’. It seems it starts with a small influence, and evolves into a landslide as a result of how much more easy it is to jump on the bandwagon of critical condemnation, lol.
Hoping we can find a better analogy that paints the universe in better terms. Lol.
But if I simply use that functional analogy, then it seems as though push increases with more mass on that object, as if the increase of mass also increases a charge disparity? Maybe more like water funneling down a drain hole made of sugar. The more water that funnels through it, the wider that drain wears away to a wider opening? Scrambling and mixing analogies here. If anyone has a better idea, I'm wide open.